hope's daughter

Kosh, (sorry that was reprise)

Reprise I am answering the post by Kosh if you don't like it close your eyes.

What is your point? Have you ever had one of your parents fufill a wish and surpass your own expectation? I am sure you have. Same thing here. Do you secretly wished God had let me die so you woould not have to put up with me now? Doesn't your question encompass cruelty? Something you continually stress that the God opf the Bible is? To me this was his kindness and love being poured out on my life. He did not have to let me know but this specifically did he tell me so this shows me this incident was very important in my life so much so I needed the reminder.

Jeremy Pallant

I'm afraid this thread has gone completely off-topic. Off to ~~Elsewhere~~.

hope's daughter

Well its not because I didn't try. No one stays on topice on these threads. Thats okay I will make ~Elsewhere~ my home for now on. If anyone wishes to find me you know where I will be.

reprise

Jeremy, is it possible to split this thread? Can we split it off at the point it derailed? I do believe that I've seen this done before.

If not, then those of us who are interested in continuing the main conversation can always start another thread.

hope's daughter

Reprise,

I think I am being unjustly picked on here. Yes lets all pick on the Christian. Look I want to continue with the thread but Kosh did ask. Why don't you tell him he is disruoptive and getting us off track and while your at it use the f****** word. Should I ignore Kosh and be mean? Should I ignore you and be mean? You know no one has a problem with ignoring a Christian and being mean!

God help these people. They need You!

reprise

No. YOU, quite specifically, start topics in the "serious" forums and then think that because you are the OP YOUR rules about what will be discussed in those threads and by whom should be given a higher priority than the rules of the SecWeb in general and Infidels in particular.

You DIDN'T try to stay within the rules. You completely disregarded the rules despite having been reminded of them by members and moderators alike.

Ironically, Elsewhere can only become your home if you persist in disregarding the rules around here. You can't START a thread in Elsewhere. Will you be complaining about your persecution at the hands of Infidels in a couple of weeks time?

Edited to add that I'm aware that I'm treading a fine line here between telling it like it is and launching into an attack ad fem attack. I do not believe that I have yet crossed that line.

Soul Invictus

If you genuinely think this way then you can have a very positive experience here at iidb.org. I would again stress that true understanding of each others positions require both parties to discuss the basis for which the conclusions with which one's reached. This was something you weren't able to do, thus landing this thread in elsewhere. Someone noted that the people here are not heartless. This is true in my experience. What isn't tolerated is any lengthy discussion with parties that aren't willing to communicate the reasoning behind their assertions.

We can learn from each other, but it will require explanation. No two people think the same, so when you make a claim, be prepared to back it up, or at least attempt, otherwise its best not to tread in unknown waters. I do have some questions for you. I have to check out your most recent replies if you don't mind..

Soul Invictus

I understand that your accident was an emotional experience, as it should be...your life was on the line. However it was very intimate and personal to you. Your experience was subjective in nature, and you said in the beginning of this thread that Christianity is not just subjective but objective. Well objectivity by definition means it should be applicable to all people. I am not trying to one up you, however when I was 10 I was in a terrible accident that may rival your experience. My family was hit by 2 semi trucks doing highway speed. I am very thankful that I survived that situation, however I do not attribute it to Jesus, so your experience is no more proof of Jesus' goodness than mine is of proof that because I don't have an affinity to Jesus, that he is of any less credence. I guess the point I'm making is that bad things..no terrible things happen to people all the time. This is an evident proof of life. People are appreciative and thankful for escaping certain negative consequences such as death. With the majority of the world being theistic in nature, this success in the midst of trouble is societally attributed to God. For your car accident that Jesus answered your prayer for, there are Muslims and Buddhists claiming the same thing, so what gives your experience any creedance over the others, is my question? Personal experiences never are objective because they are biased to the one experiencing it (not to mention they are the only ones who can experience it)

Now I would ask what does your story tell me? That you experienced an emotional, possibly traumatic experience, which fosters your certainty for your God belief. This is nothing new. This is why religion is perpetuated all the time. Malcolm X saw a vision which was surreal that he could not explain it either. This is usually how personal experiences go. This type of appeal has little to no effect on the crowd here, because I'm sure most of the posters here won't find the fundamental parts of my post disagreeable to their line of reasoning.(If I assume errantly, do let me know.)

Discussions can be entertained, but you'll want to try a different approach than this..just my suggestion.

reprise

It's even simpler than that. I stay in the "sandpit" fora because I am absolutely awed by the level of knowledge and intellect which is displayed in some of the II fora by both sides. I read the discussions because it fascinates me the stuff which people know and have researched but I am under no illusions that my own little "the Bible is inaccurate" arguments are in the same league with those which can be sustained by historians, archeologists, and theologians. I am awed with the quality of the debate which takes place in the II forums. Some of these people can even SPEAK the languages in which the original texts were written. It kind of makes anything I have to say about my own opinions in respect of religion dwarf into insignificance. These people can translate the original writings! Or they have parrticipated in the archeological digs at which the "evidence" was found.

Their talents are wonderous to me. I sit here trying to decode on a daily basis the behaviour of my contemporary human beings and these people try to unlock the riddle of past civilisations because they are so damn curious about what went before even though such knowledge probably doesn't have much contemporary application. They are your greatest allies, if only you would realise it. They have no vested interest in "proving" the existence of one or many Gods - they are simply fascinated by the behaviour of the ancients in the same manner I am fascinated by the behaviour of my contemporaries.

I am in awe of astronomers, whose theories will not be proven within their own lifetimes.

I don't think of my insatiable curiosity as being an "atheist" trait - from birth, humans are curious.

I do find that my curiosity at sometimes poses contradictions. I can understand Hawking's explanations of singularity and string theory (in the basic sense of this happens because) and yet there are aspects of "basic" maths with which I struggle. I probably couldn't offer a "mathematical proof" to save my life, but I can generally follow most of the logic involved and have found many specialists in this field very generous with their time and patience when it comes to explaining to us people who dont' understand this stuff what comes naturally to them.

I'm now rambling. The point I was trying to make is that the net is the world's greatest library and you can either use it to expand your knowledge and experience beyond anything you ever thought possible or you can use it to validate your own isolationist view of the world.

I suspect that some people find my own particular field of expertise equally attractive and daunting in the same measure. Quite frankly, I'll be very glad when American television stops misrepresenting the fields of forensic science (my son's degree) and behavioural science (my degree) - but hell, who are we to let reality get in the way of ratings?

Celsus

Sigh. If you want to claim that the Ramesses inscription supports evidence for the Hebrews in Egypt, you need to show that 'Apiru (also "Khabiri" according to your outdated source, which is what is actually on the stele) actually equals "Hebrews." You have not demonstrated this, and my first post to you was to raise the doubt about the 'Apiru being "Hebrew" and more of a social class. Once you've got that done, you need to establish that the Ramesses stele refers to Hebrews during Moses' time. You have not. Then you have to demonstrate that the cities of Pithom and Ramses as mentioned in Exodus 1:11 to which the Ramesses inscription is supposedly a confirmation of, actually existed in the Late Bronze Age, and did not actually rise in the Iron Age II, as all the evidence points to. Finally, you need to read some proper scholarship before you reply further.

Joel